Got it -- thank you
On Sun, Jan 17, 2021 at 3:40 PM Krisztián Szűcs
wrote:
> -1 (binding)
>
> We accumulated a number of blocking packaging issues (please see the
> git history on the main branch for more details).
> Since Kou has fixed most of those and the rust parquet patch has
> merged as
-1 (binding)
We accumulated a number of blocking packaging issues (please see the
git history on the main branch for more details).
Since Kou has fixed most of those and the rust parquet patch has
merged as well, I'm going to create another release candidate
tomorrow.
On Sun, Jan 17, 2021 at
All that is needed is to create a maint-3.x.x git branch. When an RC is
accepted we will then skip the steps where we in the past have rebased the
master branch.
On Sun, Jan 17, 2021 at 4:55 AM Andrew Lamb wrote:
> I really like the idea of creating a 3.0.0 branch where we can fix issues
> and
I really like the idea of creating a 3.0.0 branch where we can fix issues
and merge new features to master. I don't know who (if anyone) would do
such a thing, but I would be happy to help -- I just don't know what to do.
On Sat, Jan 16, 2021 at 2:24 PM Wes McKinney wrote:
> I would move that
I would move that we should release make any needed follow-up RC's out
of a maintenance branch and let master evolve freely
On Sat, Jan 16, 2021 at 12:47 PM Neville Dipale wrote:
>
> Hi Arrow devs,
>
> There's some bugs in the Parquet implementation which affect reading of
> data:
>
> -
Hi Arrow devs,
There's some bugs in the Parquet implementation which affect reading of
data:
- https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-11269, which was opened today,
and I just saw now.
- an issue with list schema nulls from the parquet-format's logical types.
In this
case, we misinterpret
On Sat, Jan 16, 2021 at 12:51 PM Andrew Lamb wrote:
>
> I just saw the RC0 candidate email -- thanks Krisztián.
>
> Does the RC0 mean that any subsequent merges to master can now proceed
> without affecting the 3.0.0 branch?
Technically we don't have a 3.0 release branch, but we can always create
I just saw the RC0 candidate email -- thanks Krisztián.
Does the RC0 mean that any subsequent merges to master can now proceed
without affecting the 3.0.0 branch?
On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 10:22 AM Krisztián Szűcs
wrote:
> The spark integration test fails against spark 3.0.1 with
>
>
The spark integration test fails against spark 3.0.1 with
12:21:51.996 WARN org.apache.spark.scheduler.TaskSetManager: Lost task
1.0 in stage 0.0 (TID 1, 5fc0f8cfe8d2, executor driver):
java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: Could not initialize class
org.apache.spark.sql.util.ArrowUtils$
...
Caused by:
That is great news Krisztián -- thank you
On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 6:50 AM Krisztián Szűcs
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> My plan is to cut RC0 today, just want to make sure that the spark
> integration test works with spark's latest release.
>
> Thanks, Krisztian
>
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 12:35 PM Andrew
I think we should make sure to switch to releasing from a branch in 4.0.0
so that patches can flow uninterrupted into master regardless of whether
it’s close to a release or not. We will have to make some changes to the
release tools but this seems consistent with past discussions.
On Fri, Jan
Hi,
My plan is to cut RC0 today, just want to make sure that the spark
integration test works with spark's latest release.
Thanks, Krisztian
On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 12:35 PM Andrew Lamb wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I apologize if I have missed this detail on previous emails; I wonder if
> there is any
Hi,
I apologize if I have missed this detail on previous emails; I wonder if
there is any estimate of when the Arrow 3.0 release might be finalized.
The Rust implementation has a few PRs we have been holding off merging
until the release goes out and I wanted to know if there was any estimated
13 matches
Mail list logo
